Gravity and Magnetism

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SpideroftheAbyss

Guest
I've seen evidence that magnetism and light travel in waves, and heard theories that gravity behaves in similar fashion, functioning as a wave. Light is something we seem to have a relatively firm understanding of, and can manipulate and observe in all kinds of ways. Magnetism seems to be less so, but not by too grand a scale. Gravity on the other hand, we seem to be mostly clueless over as we can't seem to affect it in any way. But it seems to me that like electromagnetic radiation, we should be able to create devices like magnifying glasses, or those that are opaque to these waves preventing their travel. Makes me wonder if anyone has ever tried making a magnifying glass out of magnets instead of glass, or arranging magnets in some way to boost or decrease their field (aside from just increasing the voltage). And if we can find a way to do it with magnets, maybe we could find a way to do it with gravity as well. It doesn't seem terribly complicated to me, but I imagine with some trial and error and a lab full of power tools I could produce SOME results.

I think the biggest problem is that people get some idea stuck in their head that something can't be done, and refuse to try lest their reputation be stained. I think refusing to try should be the true stain upon their reputation. Something else that drives me nuts is how information is reported by scientists. Apparently writing a book that explains in layman's terms the results of your study is a great way to lose all credibility as a scientist. Instead, you must use code only used by your scientific community and report in a column only your peers can read and follow. Its no wonder we're still a type I civilization.
 
O

origin

Guest
SpideroftheAbyss":189enzsl said:
I've seen evidence that magnetism and light travel in waves, and heard theories that gravity behaves in similar fashion, functioning as a wave. Light is something we seem to have a relatively firm understanding of, and can manipulate and observe in all kinds of ways. Magnetism seems to be less so, but not by too grand a scale.
Light is the visible wavelengths of electro-magnetic radiation. Light is an oscillating electric and magnetic field. We have a very good grasp on magnetism. Here is a simple graphic of how light propegates through space.

Gravity on the other hand, we seem to be mostly clueless over as we can't seem to affect it in any way. But it seems to me that like electromagnetic radiation, we should be able to create devices like magnifying glasses, or those that are opaque to these waves preventing their travel. Makes me wonder if anyone has ever tried making a magnifying glass out of magnets instead of glass, or arranging magnets in some way to boost or decrease their field (aside from just increasing the voltage). And if we can find a way to do it with magnets, maybe we could find a way to do it with gravity as well. It doesn't seem terribly complicated to me, but I imagine with some trial and error and a lab full of power tools I could produce SOME results.
Gravity is explained very well in most circumstances with General Relativity. Gravity and magnetism are completely separate forces. You cannot affect gravity with a magnetic field regardless of the strength of the magnet.

I think the biggest problem is that people get some idea stuck in their head that something can't be done, and refuse to try lest their reputation be stained. I think refusing to try should be the true stain upon their reputation.
The problem here is that you think these things were never tried. How do you think all of these laws were discovered? People have tried to use magnetism and electricity to do alot of things. The results of the experimentation was used to develop the laws we have in science. Nobody would ever be stained by going back and retrying earlier experiments. However if a scientist wants $100 million dollars in grant money to build a big magnet to change gravity - he better have some pretty good evidence that it will do something if he want that money.

Something else that drives me nuts is how information is reported by scientists. Apparently writing a book that explains in layman's terms the results of your study is a great way to lose all credibility as a scientist. Instead, you must use code only used by your scientific community and report in a column only your peers can read and follow. Its no wonder we're still a type I civilization.
There a tons of books written for the layman, if you have not found any you must not be looking. Go to a Barnes and Nobel and look at the physics book section - they are ALL for the layman, you will not find one book that is written for scientist. They wouldn't stock books for scientist - the audience is too small.
 
R

ramparts

Guest
In my experience the scientists who write well for a lay audience often get a lot of respect - if not more jealousy, too :) But you can't expect all (or even most) science writing to be geared towards laymen, because otherwise nothing would ever get done. Most physicists and astronomers are focusing on advancing knowledge, and since it takes years of training to catch up with what we know about the universe, pretty much by definition anything proposing a new result is only going to be really intelligible to a relatively small number of people.
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
There are many other threads that have discussed the Gravity/Magnetism idea, most of which are in The Unexplained, because they are distinctly different forces in our Universe.. This will probably be merged with one of the many other disciussions there.
 
U

undidly

Guest
origin
""Here is a simple graphic of how light propegates through space.""

The graphic is wrong.
It shows the electric and magnetic fields at zero together.Where is the photon energy at that time?.

The electric and magnetic fields should be shown out of step with each other .
The electric field is maximum when the magnetic field is minimum and the other way round,so that the energy of the
photon is always the same.

The text says they change together. WRONG.
 
U

undidly

Guest
theridane":woolqzdp said:
Wrong wrongity wrong. Photon's energy is independent of its phase.
""Photon's energy is independent of its phase.""

Whatever does that mean?.
Phase relative to what?.

I am talking about the relationship between the magnetic and the electric components of the photon.
They are 90 degrees out of phase.

If the electric and magnetic fields pass though zero at the same time where is the energy?.
 
T

theridane

Guest
Wave's energy, be it a photon or a wave on a pond, is constant in time (assuming zero damping). It doesn't matter whether the wave's deflection at some point is under, over or at the water level (deflection of 0), it's energy does not depend on that.

Or another example - a pendulum. In the lowest point of pendulum's travel, if it had zero energy, it would not swing back up. It's been observed to do that however ;o) the reason being that although its potential energy is indeed zero, its kinetic energy is at its maximum. At either of the highest points of a pendulum's travel the kinetic energy is zero, while the potential energy is at max. And at any point in the pendulum's travel, the total energy (sum of kinetic and potential) remains constant. The same goes for any other wave.
 
U

undidly

Guest
theridane":zez3ad9e said:
Wave's energy, be it a photon or a wave on a pond, is constant in time (assuming zero damping). It doesn't matter whether the wave's deflection at some point is under, over or at the water level (deflection of 0), it's energy does not depend on that.

Or another example - a pendulum. In the lowest point of pendulum's travel, if it had zero energy, it would not swing back up. It's been observed to do that however ;o) the reason being that although its potential energy is indeed zero, its kinetic energy is at its maximum. At either of the highest points of a pendulum's travel the kinetic energy is zero, while the potential energy is at max. And at any point in the pendulum's travel, the total energy (sum of kinetic and potential) remains constant. The same goes for any other wave.
You are saying the same thing as I am saying.

With a pendulum the potential energy is highest as the kinetic is lowest and the reverse.
If they were zero together the pendulum swing would stop.

In a photon the magnetic component is highest when the electric is lowest and the reverse.
If they were zero together the oscillation called photon would stop.

The photon graphic shows the magnetic and electric part at zero together.
This is wrong.They are 90 degrees out of phase.
 
T

theridane

Guest
No, they are not out of phase. Those are two "separate" waves. A magnetic field can oscillate on its own. An electric field can do the same. They each follow the "pendulum law" separately.
 
T

theridane

Guest
Plus two sine waves offset by 90° do not add up to 1.0, they fluctuate too (here's their sum). There's no way for two waves to be offset in such a way that their sum would be constant but non-zero (and you do believe in photons having nonzero enegy, do you).
 
U

undidly

Guest
theridane":t6khdbgk said:
Plus two sine waves offset by 90° do not add up to 1.0, they fluctuate too (here's their sum). There's no way for two waves to be offset in such a way that their sum would be constant but non-zero (and you do believe in photons having nonzero enegy, do you).
Tell me about the pendulum.
Are the potential and kinetic energies equal at their peaks?.
If at any time the total is not this same amount then where has the energy difference gone or come from?.
 
T

theridane

Guest
Energy of a pendulum is always equal to the sum of potential and kinetic. At all times, no exceptions (not even Chuck Norris this time).

At the peak the potential energy is the net energy, kinetic is zero (that's why/because it's not moving). As it starts coming down, the potential energy begins changing into kinetic, until the pendulum reaches the bottom, where it has precisely zero potential energy, because it has all been exhausted in conversion to kinetic, which at this point is at its maximum (and that's why/because the pendulum reaches its top speed there). As it starts swinging up, the process reverses - kinetic changes into potential.

So, at any point, E = E[sub]k[/sub] + E[sub]p[/sub] applies. The net energy of the system doesn't change (unless an external force starts messing with it).

If you still have doubts, you can run the numbers yourself: E[sub]k[/sub] = 0.5 * m * v[super]2[/super] and E[sub]p[/sub] = m * h * g. You'll notice that the distance travelled (which is a function of velocity (from kinetic energy), d = 0.5 * v * t) along a circle precisely reflects the change in height (which is a function of potential energy).
 
F

Fallingstar1971

Guest
Energy of a pendulum is always equal to the sum of potential and kinetic. At all times, no exceptions (not even Chuck Norris this time).
Chuck provided the Kinetic "Kick" to get the pendulum swinging to begin with. :lol:

His formula is the same as the Cylers:

F*V=FU Where F is his mass and V is his velocity and FU is the other guys Flatulent Underside hitting the floor!

Star
 
U

undidly

Guest
theridane":1dsdft7y said:
Energy of a pendulum is always equal to the sum of potential and kinetic. At all times, no exceptions (not even Chuck Norris this time).

At the peak the potential energy is the net energy, kinetic is zero (that's why/because it's not moving). As it starts coming down, the potential energy begins changing into kinetic, until the pendulum reaches the bottom, where it has precisely zero potential energy, because it has all been exhausted in conversion to kinetic, which at this point is at its maximum (and that's why/because the pendulum reaches its top speed there). As it starts swinging up, the process reverses - kinetic changes into potential.

So, at any point, E = E[sub]k[/sub] + E[sub]p[/sub] applies. The net energy of the system doesn't change (unless an external force starts messing with it).

If you still have doubts, you can run the numbers yourself: E[sub]k[/sub] = 0.5 * m * v[super]2[/super] and E[sub]p[/sub] = m * h * g. You'll notice that the distance travelled (which is a function of velocity (from kinetic energy), d = 0.5 * v * t) along a circle precisely reflects the change in height (which is a function of potential energy).
""Energy of a pendulum is always equal to the sum of potential and kinetic""

Correct.

And the energy of a photon is the sum of the electric and magnetic parts.

The graphic shows the electric and magnetic at zero together.
The graphic is wrong.
 
O

origin

Guest
undidly:
The graphic shows the electric and magnetic at zero together.
The graphic is wrong.
Go to google and search electromagnetic wave animation.

You will be amazed, everyone of the animations at the various physics sites are wrong; according to you.
 
D

drwayne

Guest
theridane":2vcycf9r said:
No, they are not out of phase. Those are two "separate" waves. A magnetic field can oscillate on its own. An electric field can do the same. They each follow the "pendulum law" separately.
Actually, the concept that is embodied in Maxwells equations and classical electrodynamics is simply this:
A time varying magnetic field yields a time varying electric field, and a time varying electric field generates
a time varying magnetic field. It is the coupled nature of the time varying fields that leads to an electromagnetic
wave.

Edited to correct a mistake
 
O

origin

Guest
drwayne":280jr7co said:
Actually, the concept that is embodied in Maxwells equations and classical electrodynamics is simply this:
A time varying magnetic field yields a time varying electric field, and a time varying electric field generates
a time varying electric field. It is the coupled nature of the time varying fields that leads to an electromagnetic
wave.
Very nice. :) Clear, simple and obvious when stated like that.
 
U

undidly

Guest
origin":1d9bwi1j said:
undidly:
The graphic shows the electric and magnetic at zero together.
The graphic is wrong.
Go to google and search electromagnetic wave animation.

You will be amazed, everyone of the animations at the various physics sites are wrong; according to you.
I am not amazed.
The animators copy each other.

Please someone just answer the question.
If the electric and magnetic parts of the photon are zero at the same time where is the energy?.
 
K

KickLaBuka

Guest
This is obviously my opinion because it is contradictory to the accepted. The electromagnetic spectrum does not posit an electric and magnetic component to be considered part of the spectrum. A photon has neither an electric nor magnetic portion yet registers on the spectrum. When an object has a charge and it moves, that constitutes a non stathc electric field, it creates a magnetic influence that goes with the electric portion. The graph you refer to shows that the strength of the magnetic field goes with the strength of the electric field. the fields do NOT propagate like that through space.
 
S

SpideroftheAbyss

Guest
I try to write so that I am not misunderstood, but it seems I've failed yet again.

origin":1p8brze9 said:
SpideroftheAbyss":1p8brze9 said:
I've seen evidence that magnetism and light travel in waves, and heard theories that gravity behaves in similar fashion, functioning as a wave. Light is something we seem to have a relatively firm understanding of, and can manipulate and observe in all kinds of ways. Magnetism seems to be less so, but not by too grand a scale.
Light is the visible wavelengths of electro-magnetic radiation. Light is an oscillating electric and magnetic field. We have a very good grasp on magnetism. Here is a simple graphic of how light propegates through space.
I'm pretty familiar with light and all the different things it is called, like radiation, and electro-magnetic radiation. I separate the two terms, light and magnetism, because they are not necessarily the same thing. I've certainly never seen where the magnetism of Fe can be placed on a frequency chart, and to my knowledge, the magnetism of Fe does not produce any photon producing vibrations like radiation does. I say we lack a good grasp on magnetism because we don't seem to be able to do most of the things we can with radiation with it, like focus its waves into a type of laser, despite that they both seem to operate in similar fashions.

Gravity on the other hand, we seem to be mostly clueless over as we can't seem to affect it in any way. But it seems to me that like electromagnetic radiation, we should be able to create devices like magnifying glasses, or those that are opaque to these waves preventing their travel. Makes me wonder if anyone has ever tried making a magnifying glass out of magnets instead of glass, or arranging magnets in some way to boost or decrease their field (aside from just increasing the voltage). And if we can find a way to do it with magnets, maybe we could find a way to do it with gravity as well. It doesn't seem terribly complicated to me, but I imagine with some trial and error and a lab full of power tools I could produce SOME results.
Gravity is explained very well in most circumstances with General Relativity. Gravity and magnetism are completely separate forces. You cannot affect gravity with a magnetic field regardless of the strength of the magnet.
The affects of gravity are explained, but its pretty obvious from concepts like "Dark Matter" that we're far from getting it. We can barely measure it, and can not modify its behavior in the least.

I think the biggest problem is that people get some idea stuck in their head that something can't be done, and refuse to try lest their reputation be stained. I think refusing to try should be the true stain upon their reputation.
The problem here is that you think these things were never tried. How do you think all of these laws were discovered? People have tried to use magnetism and electricity to do alot of things. The results of the experimentation was used to develop the laws we have in science. Nobody would ever be stained by going back and retrying earlier experiments. However if a scientist wants $100 million dollars in grant money to build a big magnet to change gravity - he better have some pretty good evidence that it will do something if he want that money.
It really doesn't take a lot of money to hunt ghosts. But anyone with the patience to do it will very quickly lose all creditability if they choose to do so professionally. Much like researching aliens or cold fusion. Even calling it cold fusion will cause people to immediately ignore everything you do. And yet, science is starting to come back around to the idea that it can be done because some bacteria seem to be able to do it. I spend most of my time doing nothing but studying real life. A lot of that research is spent just learning the history of how things were discovered.

Something else that drives me nuts is how information is reported by scientists. Apparently writing a book that explains in layman's terms the results of your study is a great way to lose all credibility as a scientist. Instead, you must use code only used by your scientific community and report in a column only your peers can read and follow. Its no wonder we're still a type I civilization.
There a tons of books written for the layman, if you have not found any you must not be looking. Go to a Barnes and Nobel and look at the physics book section - they are ALL for the layman, you will not find one book that is written for scientist. They wouldn't stock books for scientist - the audience is too small.
We have websites like Space.com, Lifescience.com and Spacedaily.com that all they do is report every little bit of news they can find that is related to science. I've taken a few college level physics classes. I'm always trying to understand things more clearly than before, and trying to perceive things differently than before. Like, its pretty evident that people seem to think that it is impossible to make anything with regular magnets that energy can be produced from them, and yet a magnet over a compass causes movement that does not stop until the field is removed or eventually dies. Put this movement into a copper coil, and what do you have? A similar experiment to the one that produces alternating current.

I'm hoping one day that I can take all the information we have in regards to physics and put it together in an organized fashion that you can easily take one concept from one field of science and apply it to another. That's where most of the really big breakthroughs occur -- seeing that something is feasible and then applying it to your specific field. Experiments today generally don't use exploration. Instead they use proofs of concept before trying anything. In this fashion, very few things ever truly get discovered, merely observed. The last person I know of that could conceive and idea and perform an experiment based on that idea was Einstein. Since him, it seems no one has really been brave enough to think very far from their box. No guts. No glory.
 
U

undidly

Guest
KickLaBuka":1n1bsrzt said:
This is obviously my opinion because it is contradictory to the accepted. The electromagnetic spectrum does not posit an electric and magnetic component to be considered part of the spectrum. A photon has neither an electric nor magnetic portion yet registers on the spectrum. When an object has a charge and it moves, that constitutes a non stathc electric field, it creates a magnetic influence that goes with the electric portion. The graph you refer to shows that the strength of the magnetic field goes with the strength of the electric field. the fields do NOT propagate like that through space.
""The graph you refer to shows that the strength of the magnetic field goes with the strength of the electric field. the fields do NOT propagate like that through space.""

You are right.
The graphic is wrong.
The difference in phase of the electric and magnetic parts determines the direction of the photon.
No difference ,no propagation.
This graphic is one amongst many that are wrong.
Do the illustrators misunderstand the instructions of the scientist who says to draw something?.
Are the drawings not checked?.
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
SpideroftheAbyss":e6wee97s said:
Like, its pretty evident that people seem to think that it is impossible to make anything with regular magnets that energy can be produced from them, and yet a magnet over a compass causes movement that does not stop until the field is removed or eventually dies. .

Simply not true. If a compass is in the earth's magnetic field, it aligns and stops. If you place a magnet with a stronger fied near it it aligns, then stops moving. It does not continue moving unless you provide energy to move the magnet.

Unless you have some other kind of compass than mine.
 
O

origin

Guest
SpideroftheAbyss":2cww3qcn said:
I'm pretty familiar with light and all the different things it is called, like radiation, and electro-magnetic radiation. I separate the two terms, light and magnetism, because they are not necessarily the same thing. I've certainly never seen where the magnetism of Fe can be placed on a frequency chart, and to my knowledge, the magnetism of Fe does not produce any photon producing vibrations like radiation does. I say we lack a good grasp on magnetism because we don't seem to be able to do most of the things we can with radiation with it, like focus its waves into a type of laser, despite that they both seem to operate in similar fashions.
You are really mixing up ideas here. Yes light is not magnetism. Light is also not electricity. Light is however a wave of elctromagnetism. We can not make a laser out of and electric field or a magnetic field because they are not waves, light is a wave. Becasue you can't make a field into a laser does not mean it is not understood. Look at Maxwells equations we have a very good grasp on electricity and magnetism.

The affects of gravity are explained, but its pretty obvious from concepts like "Dark Matter" that we're far from getting it. We can barely measure it, and can not modify its behavior in the least.
Dark matter is an unseen mass that is detected because of gravity. This doesn't really have any bearing on how much we understand gravity. Is there more to learn about gravity - certainly a quantum explanation of gravity would be nice. But even a fairly complete understanding of gravity isn't going to result in gravity magnifying equipment. It is easy to affect gravity - move a rock from point A to point B and you have changed the gravity in those areas - just not much

It really doesn't take a lot of money to hunt ghosts. But anyone with the patience to do it will very quickly lose all creditability if they choose to do so professionally.
It is very hard to take such reasearch seriously.

Much like researching aliens or cold fusion. Even calling it cold fusion will cause people to immediately ignore everything you do. And yet, science is starting to come back around to the idea that it can be done because some bacteria seem to be able to do it.
You do realize you made a statement and then shot it down yourself.

And no bacteria are capable of cold fusion - you could supply a link to prove me wrong.

Like, its pretty evident that people seem to think that it is impossible to make anything with regular magnets that energy can be produced from them
What do you mean by this? Electical power is generated from permanent magnets all the time.

Experiments today generally don't use exploration. Instead they use proofs of concept before trying anything. In this fashion, very few things ever truly get discovered, merely observed. The last person I know of that could conceive and idea and perform an experiment based on that idea was Einstein. Since him, it seems no one has really been brave enough to think very far from their box. No guts. No glory.
Wow, that is going to be some surprising news to the LHC which is the largest most expensive (probably by orders of magnitude) physics experiment ever devised.
 
O

origin

Guest
""The graph you refer to shows that the strength of the magnetic field goes with the strength of the electric field. the fields do NOT propagate like that through space.""

You are right.
You are wrong. Look at Maxwells equations, the electric field and the magnetic field are in phase. You asked where does the energy go, it doesn't go anywhere, the enegy is the wave and the is made up of the oscillating fields. Since the AC voltage varies in the form of a sine wave, when passes through zero, is there no current in the line? If you do a straight addition of the voltage over 1 cycle the voltage is zero. Do you think that means there is no current?

The graphic is wrong.
The graphic is correct. Find a graphic on the web that shows the magnetic field and the electric field out of phase for electromagnetic radiation. Do you really think that everyone copied the wrong graphic? :lol: Go to the library and look in any physics book (holy crap all the books got it wrong too!!)

The difference in phase of the electric and magnetic parts determines the direction of the photon.
No difference ,no propagation.
Wong, wrong, wrong. The direction of travel is perpendicular to the field directions. Again this is shown in the Maxwell equations.

This graphic is one amongst many that are wrong.
Oh no, ALL of the graphics are wrong - according to you. Like I said find one that is 'right'.

Do the illustrators misunderstand the instructions of the scientist who says to draw something?.
No you do not understand. There is nothing bad about being wrong - but it is a problem when you can't admitt you are wrong. Are you really so arrogant to think that all the physics books and the entire web has it wrong and they need you to point it out to them. :roll:

edited to make my responses sound more like the english language.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY